A. At the time of each of the instant crimes with mental disorder, the Defendant suffered from mental illness, such as depression and alcohol dementia. In addition, the first instance court did not recognize it, even though the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder for drinking alcohol after taking a mental and physical medicine.

B. The sentence imposed on the defendant by the first instance court of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record as to the assertion of mental disorder, it is recognized that the Defendant received a mental therapy due to depression from January 2012 to April 2013, 2013, and that it appears that he was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of each of the instant crimes, and that he/she seems to have a little degree of dependence on common sense and that he/she was in a state of drinking alcohol.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence, i.e., violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (special rape), i.e., (i) the Defendant: (a) the Defendant: (b) the Defendant: (c) the victim, who was working in the part of the strike, allowed the victim to drinking water; (d) the victim to use the knife; and (e) threatened the victim with it; (c) the victim; (d) the victim was suffering from the knife; (d) the police investigation immediately after the crime was conducted; (d) most of the circumstances at the time when the Defendant was investigated; (d) the special larceny was committed; (i) the windows of another person’s photographor, carried the glass door into his/her own camera; and (ii) the Defendant’s act before and after the crime was committed, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant either lost his/her ability to make a decision or weak at the time of each of the instant crimes.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. Regarding the assertion of unfair sentencing